I'm really having trouble believing Obama on this stuff though. He can say whatever he wants, but he needs to start walking the walk as well, and so far he really isn't.
As Bob Dylan put it in "The Times They Are A'Changin'": Your old road is
rapidly agin'./ Please get out of the new one /If you can't lend your hand
If you're not going to actually do something to help further the cause of equality, stop pretending you stand with us. We can see right through it.
@Erda: But you know what? The fact that we even have a president willing to throw in his lot with the HRC? Astounding, considering the past 10 years or so.
@lalie (apologetic mess): I hear you, but then again, the last 10 years or so were a fucking sick joke. It's like watching a B- response to a national disaster, knowing more lives could have been saved, and throwing up your hands and saying, "Well, it's a helluva better job than Katrina."
Not good enough.
Better? Sure. But better than Bush isn't really a reasonable metric by which to measure the equality of so many US citizens and families.
Well at the VERY least, he's changed his tune on DOMA. Small victory.
But Christ, this country's journey to social change for gays feels more like a long and complicated tooth extraction.
@Lainface: Everyplace is slow. It took a long time to learn this stuff, it will take time to unlearn it. But that's no excuse not to keep moving forward at full steam speed.
A colleague of mine was reading quotes from him about the peace prize and I asked "so what does that mean?" She replied, "That's he's a really good orater."
this at least is a little more concrete, but I feel like a lot of his speeches are a whole lotta nothin dressed up up in pretty clothes.
I'm still hopeful. Not sure how much longer that hope is going to hold out, but it's still there for now.
@BowlingForDollars: Exactly. As I said on my bloggo, you can only hear so many wonderfully supportive things so many times before you begin to listen with a cautious ear, and looking for tangible follow-through
I want to know that our President knows he hasn’t got a carte blanche to tell us to be patient indefinitely. We want quantifiable, measurable progress and / or some sort of timeline, which isn’t unreasonable. Intent, intent, intent with little or no follow-through and this ridiculous hemming and hawing is exactly what he pledged to radically change in his inaugural speech, so specifics would be nice.
Also, I’d love to watch an old Clinton speech of comparable import and see how they differ or not.
I love that he said these things, though I hate to admit that in the back of my head I keep hearing one name:
Jimmy Carter.
And this isn't meant as a negative towards Obama; its a fear of mine. Carter more or less shot himself in the foot by telling us we were screwed as a nation if we didn't change...and he was right. And that paved the way for the Regan era conservatives to, well, continue ruining anything. And given the current climate...well...
While I hope the right wing nutjobs shoot themselves in the foot and fail to get a mainstream candidate for 2012, everytime Obama says something like he said tonight that could pave the way for actual change...I get scared. But I'm glad he's trying. Rome wasn't built in a day.
As far as civil unions over marriage? Yes, ultimately...its wrong. But unfortunately, you can't push the issue in his climate without hurting the cause further. (I believe Roosevelt said something about this? I can't find the quote. But I know Clinton's rationale for signing the DOMA had to do with a political concession because it more or less reaffirms what already would have been Constiutional. Doesn't excuse my disgust over him signing it, but I understood why he did. And hated it.) Its the unfortunate reality of politics in his country and I can honestly say I hope to live in a country that will allow gay people to get married someday; I just don't know how many years we'll have to wait. :-/
@tankearae: I do see what you're saying, but to me, it's attitudes like this that make me crazy. People didn't give a rat's ass when Bush shoved crap down out throats - in fact, he got re-elected. Perhaps if Obama passes some of these items early in his admin, then they will have time to calm down wayyyy before he tries to get re-elected.
Remember when the sky was going to fall when the few states legalized gay marriage? It's almost become a non-issue. I bet the average conservative can't even name the states that have approved gay marriage. Or isn't even aware that legal gay marriage exists anywhere in this country.
Goddammit, I'd tired of this fucking country pandering to extreme wingnuts. That's what's wrong with the USA now. If we actually stand for freedom, equal rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then legislating hate needs to be repealed yesterday.
@BowlingForDollars: Well, as far as Bush shoving crap down people's throats? Kind of a different situation since paranoia about the future and that kind of propaganda has been going on for centuries, really. And it strikes me as kind on inapposite. That said, having just watched tonight's Mad Men (which was kind of a somber reminder of how awful all of this "not the time" sounds, and I'm fully aware that it IS awful...), I understand where you're coming from...but are we actually in a climate where its ever gonna happen? I mean, if I had my choice of candidates up there it would certainly be someone with the balls to push for gay marriage, but does the support actually EXIST on a federal level? (the federal level is key; clearly some states are game...) I don't see any evidence that it does, and that's a huge problem...and a huge barrier to the president and what he can actually push for.
I guess I've had my hopes for this country dashed too many times; because I just can't be positive anymore. (Well, that and having gone to law school and gotten a different perspective on the nature of politics) I wish I could, but the fight is gone. And yes, I hate myself for saying that because, well...what right do I have to complain if I don't have enough faith in people to help the causes I care about? Its clear it still exists in some form; I just don't know how much that can do.
@TheGuvnah: Allow me to pout for a minute, JLo met the pres/took a guided tour of the White House, Lady Fucking Gaga passed the presidents lips. Tantrum time...it's not fair! and I'm not going to eat my vegetables!
I really hope this gets a lot of press. I mean, after I read this I went over to nytimes.com to see if it had made it over there yet but it's still nowhere to be seen. Obama can make all the promises he wants to a private function but until he makes statements like those to a national audience there won't be any changes. My biggest fear is that he'll keep using the economy, healthcare, and now Afghanistan as excuses for his inaction. Mr. President better up his game.
Nonetheless, "Together, we will have moved closer to that day when no one has to be afraid to be gay in America. When no one has to be afraid to walk down the street holding the hand of the person they love." really resonated with me.
GOD AMERICA, GET OVER YOURSELF AND JUST ACCEPT LOVE ALREADY.
That was a vague damn speech, but I feel like there was sincerity there, and anyway if he didn't actually want to commit to the issues he didn't have to; by doing so he seems to be giving ammunition to right-wing critics, and I dare think he's too savvy to throw around political capital like that without any intent to have his actions measure up to his speech. I also suspect that he is choosing his words carefully on the subject so as not to give the opposition the playbook, but I remain skeptical, and as a voter I will not simply support him because he is not the conservative guy; I expect him to follow through on his promises. Now that he has patted us on the heads, though, I do expect a shift in tone from the White House and to see some sort of timetable for these things in the coming months. He has said all of these things before, and done nothing for several months on these issues, so while I will take him at his word I also reckon that I will have more admiration for what he actually does rather than what he chooses to say.
@BearDownCBears: I'm also more attractive than him (jokes!), but on the whole I agree with Sullivan's general feeling of dejection on the issue. I just try really, really, really, really, really, really hard not to be overly cynical, but I've had my moments. This issue is frustrating, and as a politican he is all over the map about it. When he talked about how he didn't support gay marriages but supported civil unions, but that the two were essentially the same, it took several weeks to pick my jaw off the floor and stop myself from repeating the phrase "separate but equal" over and over again in my sleep.
But I'm trying super hard to be less skeptical about shit these days and less of an asshole about these things to encourage civil discourse. If this stays the same by the time New Year's gets here I will probably be singing a different damn tune.
@ampersandparade: The more I see shit like this, the more I want to a) end the Senate (or at least add more senators to populous states) and b) end the electoral college. I've wanted (b) for a long time, but (a) is new to me.
@BearDownCBears: I haven't thought about (a) as my more anarchal desires have been suppressed in adulthood, but upon thought the Senate really is like a filter through which our American life must first be run through, and that's painful because with so few Senators (comparably) and so many of them staying in for vast periods of time, they tend to have a view of our culture that is often times dated and is generally influenced by old standards of acceptability. Sometimes I see senators say or do something, and think to myself, "this isn't contemporary of life today at all, they're just using the playbook from 1993 and haven't realized how quickly the world is modernizing." And then I begin drinking. The Senate will be the life and death of my future civil rights, and that worries me to no end.
(b) absolutely needs to happen, and not merely just in our lifetimes. But if President Obama is having such trouble just articulating basic civil rights issues, I imagine the electoral college would be too complex a challenge.
I understand the idea of the Senate is to prevent regional discrimination and steamrolling. But it's gone too far as the country's population grows (unevenly). I mean, WYOMING has as many senators as California? That's just not democratic.
Of course Yglesias is an uber-urbanite. One reservation I have, which is sort of irrational, is that I'm enough of a transplanted hick Midwesterner to still feel queasy about Yglesias's wet dream that we all live in beehives two feet from a downtown.
@BearDownCBears:
I think that the crafting of the Senate and the House of Representatives was a brilliant move by our founding fathers, though I admit that term limits for Senators might improve things.
If anything, I think we should boost the number of Senators from each state (3, 4?) so that it becomes easier to communicate with our elected officials.
Gay marriage is an important issue, but, honestly, it's trivial compared to, for instance, the exploitation of coal miners in West Virginia, which is nothing short of pure evil. And that's a clear case of large and power states ignoring the issues of small ones.
@tilly76: I don't think I follow your last paragraph. Everything I've read or heard on the radio leads me to believe that the mining companies pretty much own their states, and therefore nothing gets done. Are you upset because no one outside of WV or Pennsylvania or wherever picks up the cause and makes it national, and this is because big bruising states already don't care about little ones, and therefore reducing federalism would make this worse? Seems to me miner exploitation wallows especially because it's a "state" issue, one that other people expect the mining states to take care of it, whereas gays are all over.
My takeaway is that he really means it. If politicians want to leave things waffly and up in the air, they know a thousand ways to word it. For Obama to say point blank that he will end DADT, that means he is determined and has made up his mind.
@Kilotwat: Pardon me my cynicism, but he said point blank that he would end it before the election and so far has done nothing.
There have been almost 450 discharges under DADT since Obama was sworn in, despite the fact that he could end the policy by executive order (as Truman did with segregation in the military), or at least freeze the firings while ordering an investigation of the policy's effectiveness.
But no, he keeps saying Congressional approval is needed. As Jon Stewart said, "It's ***king chow time, brother." [www.thedailyshow.com]
@greeneyedfem: I'm not saying he's going to do it now, or soon. I'm not saying he couldn't have done it sooner. I'm just saying I believe he plans to end DADT at some point before he's out of office.
Patience y'all. Despite what Fox News tells us, Obama isn't actually an Emperor with his own personal death squad of anti-freedom Gay Kenyan abortion ninjas. There is a democratic legislative process to prepare and execute. He's on that shit, but shit takes time to do properly.
He never says gay marriage though :/ And what about health care? I'm still waiting....
Also, I was wondering if anyone knew what a better solution to Don't Ask, Don't Tell would be. I'm not being sarcastic, I just would really like some literature on the solution to the problem.
Or is it the really obvious choice, and I am just being accidentally homophobic? (In which case, I'm sorry!)
@BearDownCBears: DOMA definitely needs to die. It would be nice if people who are legally married within their own states could have their marriages recognized by the federal friggin' government. Legally married gays still can't file federal tax documents as married. Or gain federal benefits. Or...or... *sigh* So many steps forward, so many steps to go.
@GreyCat: Is there something else on the fed books that says marriage = man + woman? Because DOMA was all I knew of. I figured that's why you couldn't file IRS forms--no national consensus. Is there another reason? I don't know how interracial marriage works as a precedent in this context either, if somebody wants to pipe up as a PSA.
@BearDownCBears: "DOMA defines marriage under federal law to include only opposite-sex couples. DOMA discriminates uniquely against same-sex couples; for all other couples, marital status is determined by the law of the taxpayer’s state of residence" (from www.hrc.org) In addition, 37 states have passed laws refusing to recognize marriages by same-sex couples from other jurisdictions. So if you legally marry in Iowa and move to another state, that state does not have to treat you as married BUT ONLY IF YOU ARE SAME-SEX. My marriage to my husband is legal in all 50 states. I can't imagine moving to another state and being told that 1. I could not file taxes as married, and 2. my relationship was icky and will send me straight to hell.
@BearDownCBears: That's how I understand it, yes. Repealing DOMA also would make it much, much easier to challenge a state's do-not-recognise law, and once falls the rest are unconstitutional by definition.
Yay! When? But yay! But when? But yay! But when? But yay! But when? But yay! But when? But yay! But when? But yay! But when? But yay! But when? But yay!
10/11/09
As Bob Dylan put it in "The Times They Are A'Changin'": Your old road is
rapidly agin'./ Please get out of the new one /If you can't lend your hand
If you're not going to actually do something to help further the cause of equality, stop pretending you stand with us. We can see right through it.
10/11/09
10/11/09
Not good enough.
Better? Sure. But better than Bush isn't really a reasonable metric by which to measure the equality of so many US citizens and families.
10/11/09
But Christ, this country's journey to social change for gays feels more like a long and complicated tooth extraction.
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
this at least is a little more concrete, but I feel like a lot of his speeches are a whole lotta nothin dressed up up in pretty clothes.
I'm still hopeful. Not sure how much longer that hope is going to hold out, but it's still there for now.
yay equality!
10/10/09
Obama, you give me a jingle when you repeal that act, and pass "domestic partners"/gay marriage.
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
I want to know that our President knows he hasn’t got a carte blanche to tell us to be patient indefinitely. We want quantifiable, measurable progress and / or some sort of timeline, which isn’t unreasonable. Intent, intent, intent with little or no follow-through and this ridiculous hemming and hawing is exactly what he pledged to radically change in his inaugural speech, so specifics would be nice.
Also, I’d love to watch an old Clinton speech of comparable import and see how they differ or not.
10/10/09
Jimmy Carter.
And this isn't meant as a negative towards Obama; its a fear of mine. Carter more or less shot himself in the foot by telling us we were screwed as a nation if we didn't change...and he was right. And that paved the way for the Regan era conservatives to, well, continue ruining anything. And given the current climate...well...
While I hope the right wing nutjobs shoot themselves in the foot and fail to get a mainstream candidate for 2012, everytime Obama says something like he said tonight that could pave the way for actual change...I get scared. But I'm glad he's trying. Rome wasn't built in a day.
As far as civil unions over marriage? Yes, ultimately...its wrong. But unfortunately, you can't push the issue in his climate without hurting the cause further. (I believe Roosevelt said something about this? I can't find the quote. But I know Clinton's rationale for signing the DOMA had to do with a political concession because it more or less reaffirms what already would have been Constiutional. Doesn't excuse my disgust over him signing it, but I understood why he did. And hated it.) Its the unfortunate reality of politics in his country and I can honestly say I hope to live in a country that will allow gay people to get married someday; I just don't know how many years we'll have to wait. :-/
10/11/09
Remember when the sky was going to fall when the few states legalized gay marriage? It's almost become a non-issue. I bet the average conservative can't even name the states that have approved gay marriage. Or isn't even aware that legal gay marriage exists anywhere in this country.
Goddammit, I'd tired of this fucking country pandering to extreme wingnuts. That's what's wrong with the USA now. If we actually stand for freedom, equal rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then legislating hate needs to be repealed yesterday.
10/12/09
I guess I've had my hopes for this country dashed too many times; because I just can't be positive anymore. (Well, that and having gone to law school and gotten a different perspective on the nature of politics) I wish I could, but the fight is gone. And yes, I hate myself for saying that because, well...what right do I have to complain if I don't have enough faith in people to help the causes I care about? Its clear it still exists in some form; I just don't know how much that can do.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
Nonetheless, "Together, we will have moved closer to that day when no one has to be afraid to be gay in America. When no one has to be afraid to walk down the street holding the hand of the person they love." really resonated with me.
GOD AMERICA, GET OVER YOURSELF AND JUST ACCEPT LOVE ALREADY.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
But I'm trying super hard to be less skeptical about shit these days and less of an asshole about these things to encourage civil discourse. If this stays the same by the time New Year's gets here I will probably be singing a different damn tune.
10/10/09
10/10/09
(b) absolutely needs to happen, and not merely just in our lifetimes. But if President Obama is having such trouble just articulating basic civil rights issues, I imagine the electoral college would be too complex a challenge.
10/10/09
[yglesias.thinkprogress.org]
I understand the idea of the Senate is to prevent regional discrimination and steamrolling. But it's gone too far as the country's population grows (unevenly). I mean, WYOMING has as many senators as California? That's just not democratic.
Of course Yglesias is an uber-urbanite. One reservation I have, which is sort of irrational, is that I'm enough of a transplanted hick Midwesterner to still feel queasy about Yglesias's wet dream that we all live in beehives two feet from a downtown.
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
I think that the crafting of the Senate and the House of Representatives was a brilliant move by our founding fathers, though I admit that term limits for Senators might improve things.
If anything, I think we should boost the number of Senators from each state (3, 4?) so that it becomes easier to communicate with our elected officials.
Gay marriage is an important issue, but, honestly, it's trivial compared to, for instance, the exploitation of coal miners in West Virginia, which is nothing short of pure evil. And that's a clear case of large and power states ignoring the issues of small ones.
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/12/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
There have been almost 450 discharges under DADT since Obama was sworn in, despite the fact that he could end the policy by executive order (as Truman did with segregation in the military), or at least freeze the firings while ordering an investigation of the policy's effectiveness.
But no, he keeps saying Congressional approval is needed. As Jon Stewart said, "It's ***king chow time, brother." [www.thedailyshow.com]
10/11/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
Also, I was wondering if anyone knew what a better solution to Don't Ask, Don't Tell would be. I'm not being sarcastic, I just would really like some literature on the solution to the problem.
Or is it the really obvious choice, and I am just being accidentally homophobic? (In which case, I'm sorry!)
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09